well, the cavs are out, where will LeBron be in 2011?

[NovU]

I don't know how Lebron is one dimensional player when dribbling, shooting, defense, penetration, passing, being a leader & go-to-guy etc all are part of his game.

[benji]

Regardless of who is, anyone who can do more than one thing is a more complete player than LeBron. All he does is penetrate. That's it.

So the two-thirds of his shots that are jumpers are a myth?

That doesn't make him a complete player, that makes him a one-dimensional player.

Uh huh. LeBron James, last seen getting a triple double while giving up, is one-dimensional.

We can play this game all day. Kevin Durant is one-dimensional, all he does is shoot. Dwyane Wade is one-dimensional, all he does is penetrate. Kobe Bryant is one-dimensional, all he does is shoot. Greg Oden is one-dimensional, all he does is get injured.

spot up for perimeter jumpshots

Why should LeBron James, maybe the best player at driving to the basket in NBA history, be sitting around the three point line like he's Kyle Korver or Bruce Bowen?

or get to the line and shoot a high percentage.

Except he does get to the line, only two other players over the last three years went to the line more times per minute. Dwight Howard and Corey Maggette. Could he shoot better than 75%? It's possible. Duncan, Wade, Shaq, etc. all these guys could theoretically shoot better at the line but they don't. It doesn't take away everything else they do.

You know how many NBA players over that same time span hit 90% of their free throws like your eminence? Six. You know how many of those six took more than a third as many free throws as LeBron does? One, Chauncey Billups.

By the way, still wondering about those players who lived up to their potential.

[koberulz]

I don't know how Lebron is one dimensional player when dribbling, penetration

And driving. Also getting to the basket from the perimeter. Synonyms are fun.

passing

Off of penetration...I'm sensing a theme here.

shooting, defense, being a leader

Debatable.

& go-to-guy

And why is he a go-to guy? Because he's good at getting to the rim. Via a dribble. Also known as penetration. I think we've touched on this one.

So the two-thirds of his shots that are jumpers are a myth?

There's a difference between doing something and doing it well.

We can play this game all day. Kevin Durant is one-dimensional, all he does is shoot. Dwyane Wade is one-dimensional, all he does is penetrate. Kobe Bryant is one-dimensional, all he does is shoot.

Haven't seen enough of Durant or Wade to comment. Bryant has a post game, a mid-range game, and can get to the rim, so even ignoring that shooting isn't all he does, he can get his shot off in more than one way.

Why should LeBron James, maybe the best player at driving to the basket in NBA history, be sitting around the three point line like he's Kyle Korver or Bruce Bowen?

To prevent the defense from packing the paint and waiting for him. To make the defense play him on the perimeter. To be a threat without the ball, particularly if you're talking about pairing him with Wade. All the time? No. But it's something that would make him a more complete player and a bigger offensive threat.

Except he does get to the line, only two other players over the last three years went to the line more times per minute.

"and shoot a high percentage". Try putting Kobe or Michael on the line constantly, see where that gets you.

[benji]

There's a difference between doing something and doing it well.

So you're changing your argument again?

Sorry, the reality of being a perimeter player, especially when combined with the reality of being a go-to-guy is that you take a lot of bad jumpers late in the clock. LeBron takes 64% of his shots as jumpers and his eFG on them is 44%. Durant is at 75% and 45%, Kobe at 77% and 46%. Wade is 63% and 39%. Melo is 63% and 41%. Monta Ellis is 66% and 40%. So of the top six usage guys, LeBron is smack dab in the middle of them in this regard and closer to the two perimeter threats than he is to the brick-layers.

Haven't seen enough of Durant or Wade to comment.

What exactly are you basing any evaluation of LeBron on? You keep saying you haven't seen this, or that, or these other contemporaries. So how can you evaluate LeBron without placing him in the context of AT LEAST his contemporaries?

Bryant has a post game, a mid-range game, and can get to the rim, so even ignoring that shooting isn't all he does

But all of those are shooting.

he can get his shot off in more than one way.

LeBron can't? Maybe you should look up the LeBron-Melo duel from earlier in the season (or the famous Pistons game from a few years back, or the one game from the Orlando series last year) to see exactly how, when LeBron is on, he can be as devastating from anywhere as any great high-usage player.

To prevent the defense from packing the paint and waiting for him. To make the defense play him on the perimeter. To be a threat without the ball, particularly if you're talking about pairing him with Wade. All the time? No. But it's something that would make him a more complete player and a bigger offensive threat.

But it would take away from his greatest talent. The fact that he's a monster and nobody can stop him on those drives. (Which his ability to find players increases.) LeBron has the range and nobody plays him entirely for the drive (even though they hedge) because he can still nail jumpers on you. It's like when teams played Shaq for the scoring in the paint or his passing, you can't play both, you have to pick your battle. The Pistons in 2004 decided to stop the threes and Kobe, while ignoring Shaq, other teams, the Nets and Sixers for example, were more afraid of and centered around trying to deny Shaq his scoring. Teams rarely if ever have their man drop off LeBron and wait for the drive, instead they overplay him on the perimeter out of the hope of having that defender be a trip-wire. And if you had read this thread, I already mentioned that his biggest problem when he faces up is that he steps back to size up the guy defending him and tries to beat him on raw speed, instead of keeping the defender closer and using his quickness.

If LeBron was on, say the Suns in place of Grant Hill, he would completely unguardable. A Wade pairing would be fine, LeBron would defer in the short-term and the situation (unlike Cleveland where they relied on him to generate their entire offense on every possession) would allow him to focus on developing off the ball skills and Wade would be able to create just as many offensive opportunities.

"and shoot a high percentage". Try putting Kobe or Michael on the line constantly, see where that gets you.

Do you want a player who gets to the line ten times and shoots 75% giving you seven or eight points from there (and twice as many three-point plays), or do you want a player who gets to the line seven times and shoots 84% giving you six points?

[NovU]

And driving. Also getting to the basket from the perimeter. Synonyms are fun.

Debatable.

Please do.

And why is he a go-to guy? Because he's good at getting to the rim. Via a dribble. Also known as penetration. I think we've touched on this one.

Great, at least you have one right. Also being able to shake off the defender off the dribble, giving him options, shoot over defender, pass, luring double team to set up teammates, and of course penetration also known as driving. And of course, we saw how much of a clutch performer he can be, in the series against the Pistons a few years back. A great go-to-guy. Another asset to being a complete player.

There's a difference between doing something and doing it well.

And he does it well.

Bryant has a post game, a mid-range game, and can get to the rim,

Apply your logic here and we have... post up only to end up shooting, and penetrate only to end up shooting again. Stats actually back me up too.

To prevent the defense from packing the paint and waiting for him. To make the defense play him on the perimeter. To be a threat without the ball, particularly if you're talking about pairing him with Wade. All the time? No. But it's something that would make him a more complete player and a bigger offensive threat.

Except that he never needed to be a spot up jump shooter so far in his career, nor anybody ever asked. You probably are the only one that's asking him to be a spot up jumpshooter while he's getting paid 30 mil a year. Noice. Very noice indeed.

"and shoot a high percentage". Try putting Kobe or Michael on the line constantly, see where that gets you.

Let's play your own game here and say Kobe and Jordan are also fail since they were never the best at FT line, thus making them incomplete as fucks...

[koberulz]

There's a difference between doing something and doing it well.

And he does it well.

Shoot? No, no he does not.

Apply your logic here and we have... post up only to end up shooting, and penetrate only to end up shooting again.

And all of it is playing basketball. Get broad enough and everything ends up the same way. That doesn't suddenly give LeBron a post game.

Stats actually back me up too.

How?

Except that he never needed to be a spot up jump shooter so far in his career, nor anybody ever asked.

Nobody asked Michael or Kobe to get post games, either. But they did, because it would make them better.

Let's play your own game here and say Kobe and Jordan are also fail since they were never the best at FT line, thus making them incomplete as fucks...

There can only be one 'best', so that's just silly. It doesn't make sub-80% free-throw shooters any good.

Sorry, the reality of being a perimeter player, especially when combined with the reality of being a go-to-guy is that you take a lot of bad jumpers late in the clock. LeBron takes 64% of his shots as jumpers and his eFG on them is 44%. Durant is at 75% and 45%, Kobe at 77% and 46%. Wade is 63% and 39%. Melo is 63% and 41%. Monta Ellis is 66% and 40%. So of the top six usage guys, LeBron is smack dab in the middle of them in this regard and closer to the two perimeter threats than he is to the brick-layers.

I hate to pull out the "watch the games" argument, but a lot of LeBron's shots are good looks that he misses anyway. Backing off of LeBron and letting him shoot is a decent strategy. Do that to Kobe, you're just asking for trouble.

Maybe you should look up the LeBron-Melo duel from earlier in the season

When was that? I'll have a look for it tomorrow. Already have the Pistons game, and I've actually been planning to give it another watch.

[benji]

I hate to pull out the "watch the games" argument, but a lot of LeBron's shots are good looks that he misses anyway. Backing off of LeBron and letting him shoot is a decent strategy. Do that to Kobe, you're just asking for trouble.

And I hate to pull the "where's the evidence" question, but if it happens so often why doesn't it show up in the numbers?

LeBron's bad shots are almost universally long two-pointers off the dribble. (Like everyone in the league.)

When was that? I'll have a look for it tomorrow.

February 18th: http://www.basketball-reference.com/box ... 80CLE.html

Shoot? No, no he does not.

Number of players who between 6-5 and 6-9, playing 2500+ minutes last season who shot better from the floor than LeBron: Carlos Boozer and Ray Allen. Players who had a higher TS%: Kevin Durant.

Nobody asked Michael or Kobe to get post games, either. But they did, because it would make them better.

And at LeBron's age: Jordan was still trying to create the entire offense on his own, and Kobe was getting everyone bailed off the Lakers while jacking shots at the highest rate in history. It's easy to forget Jordan came back from retirement with his infamous post-game, it was a recognition of a need to deal with declining athleticism while taking advantage of smaller guards. No, LeBron isn't posting up every mismatch, he's doing the same thing Jordan and Kobe were doing at his age, sizing them up and beating them off the dribble. This is not insane thinking, posting up limits your movement, these players are or were all great at their ability to move. Where it hurts LeBron is that he's an incredible passer, so he'd be basically unstoppable with just a handful of post moves. If Mike Brown wasn't so afraid of going small and playing LeBron at PF, he might have recognized a need to add some moves down there.

There can only be one 'best', so that's just silly. It doesn't make sub-80% free-throw shooters any good.

So Wade isn't any good? Shaq wasn't any good? Duncan wasn't any good? Wilt wasn't any good? Bill Russell wasn't any good? Kareem? Malone? Or are we just talking about free throws? Because as I illustrated above (and was shockingly ignored yet again, like say a certain question about potential), FT% alone doesn't mean much. As I should have said, players who sit on the perimeter and hit free throws at high rates tend not to be fouled. (SHOCKING FACT: No player in NBA history has ever taken eight or more free throws per 36 while shooting 85+% at the line. Mack Calvin did it in the ABA. Cutting to seven brings you Kevin Durant and Kevin Martin.)

Using your 80% threshold? Adrian "God Damn" Dantley and Corey Maggette. (Seven gives us: Jordan, Bryant, Carmelo Anthony, Dominique Wilkins, Gilbert Arenas, Paul Pierce in addition to our two Kevin's.)

[koberulz]

So Wade isn't any good? Shaq wasn't any good? Duncan wasn't any good? Wilt wasn't any good? Bill Russell wasn't any good? Kareem? Malone? Or are we just talking about free throws?

In that sentence I was, yes.

Because as I illustrated above (and was shockingly ignored yet again, like say a certain question about potential), FT% alone doesn't mean much. As I should have said, players who sit on the perimeter and hit free throws at high rates tend not to be fouled. (SHOCKING FACT: No player in NBA history has ever taken eight or more free throws per 36 while shooting 85+% at the line. Mack Calvin did it in the ABA. Cutting to seven brings you Kevin Durant and Kevin Martin.)

Using your 80% threshold? Adrian "God Damn" Dantley and Corey Maggette.

It's only logical that high-percentage free-throw shooters get fouled less. What this leads to is higher-percentage shooting, because they're playing through less contact. It's not so much about them scoring less from the line, as being more effective because the defense doesn't have the "out" of just hacking them whenever they enter the paint. When you're the size of LeBron, Shaq, or Dwight, it matters less than with other players because you can finish through contact at a higher percentage than other players, but there are still times what could have been a dunk gets turned into an 0-2 from the line.

[NovU]

Shoot? No, no he does not.

Proof? Cuz the stats don't back you up.

Apply your logic here and we have... post up only to end up shooting, and penetrate only to end up shooting again.

And all of it is playing basketball. Get broad enough and everything ends up the same way. That doesn't suddenly give LeBron a post game.

Don't get silly here. If you are only crying about Lebron not having a post game, please state the reasons first why he has been widely considered a better player in past few years despite not having a post up game.

Stats actually back me up too.

How?

How not on something so obvious?

Nobody asked Michael or Kobe to get post games, either. But they did, because it would make them better.

How is that even relevant to Lebron becoming a spot up jump shooter? Were they spot up jump shooters?

There can only be one 'best', so that's just silly. It doesn't make sub-80% free-throw shooters any good.

That's by your standard. Also saying against your own logic of "Can be better"...

a lot of LeBron's shots are good looks that he misses anyway. Backing off of LeBron and letting him shoot is a decent strategy. Do that to Kobe, you're just asking for trouble.

That still isn't saying much about Lebron being one dimensional especially without a proof to back it up. Kobe’s shooting indeed has been his strength for sure, and if you are claiming Kobe's the one dimensional player, then you are making a sense there.

[benji]

Of course it's logical, but I'm not sure your reasoning as to why is accurate.

High percentage foul shooters almost universally are perimeter based players because they are not just high percentage foul shooters but high percentage jump shooters who often lack the skills to penetrate which draws contact and thus fouls. As such, they hang out on the perimeter where you are drastically less likely to get any kind of shooting foul, let alone a foul at all.

It is not a case of the defense taking an "out" by "hacking" it is more of a case of the player not venturing into the paint to begin with. The lack of higher FTA and high FT% players consisting of the fact that in NBA history I could only find eleven TOTAL supports this theory. Especially when we look at the players on the list. Maggette, Pierce (in his prime) and Arenas drive like mad and are big for their positions, as did Wilkins. Dantley and Anthony both have scored many points by being unique post up scorers for their position. Jordan and Bryant were already discussed and have obvious advantages. While our Kevins have taken the Billups route of combining bombing in threes with driving to the basket in a way that has been quite effective.

If I were to instead take a sample of the FT percentages over 85%, the gross majority, likely 85+% would be players who rarely traversed to the line even despite high usages. Indeed, when one expands the list to players of all positions who meet the prior criteria we still do not get many players who live at the line despite high percentage shooting.

Which brings us back to the original point (which was of course ignored) of this line of reasoning. LeBron, despite 75% shooting, takes vastly more free throws and thus brings you seven to eight points from the line plus twice as many "and-ones." A player like Kobe can shoot 84% but gets you only six points.

But what do I know, there's a lot more than my height holding me back from dominating the NBA. Or even the NBL.

[koberulz]

Shoot? No, no he does not.

Proof? Cuz the stats don't back you up.

Really? Shooting 33% from three is absolutely the bare minimum requirement to be allowed to shoot at all. 40% is generally the 'green-light' number.

Apply your logic here and we have... post up only to end up shooting, and penetrate only to end up shooting again.

And all of it is playing basketball. Get broad enough and everything ends up the same way. That doesn't suddenly give LeBron a post game.

Don't get silly here. If you are only crying about Lebron not having a post game, please state the reasons first why he has been widely considered a better player in past few years despite not having a post up game.

Not only does that have nothing to do with my point, it doesn't even make any sense.

Stats actually back me up too.

How?

How not on something so obvious?

Something so obvious as what? I'm not even sure what your point is, I sure as hell can't see stats to back it up. That he's a good shooter? They don't. That he's a 'complete' player? There aren't any stats for that specifically.

Nobody asked Michael or Kobe to get post games, either. But they did, because it would make them better.

How is that even relevant to Lebron becoming a spot up jump shooter? Were they spot up jump shooters?

When did I say that it was exclusively about spot-up jumpshooting? Further, do you really think that hitting a wide-open Kobe Bryant off penetration is going to lead to a poor shot?

There can only be one 'best', so that's just silly. It doesn't make sub-80% free-throw shooters any good.

That's by your standard. Also saying against your own logic of "Can be better"...

Anyone shooting below 80% from the free-throw line should be shooting better.

a lot of LeBron's shots are good looks that he misses anyway. Backing off of LeBron and letting him shoot is a decent strategy. Do that to Kobe, you're just asking for trouble.

That still isn't saying much about Lebron being one dimensional especially without a proof to back it up. Kobe’s shooting indeed has been his strength for sure, and if you are claiming Kobe's the one dimensional player, then you are making a sense there.

What? You concede that he's a poor shooter and then say that's irrelevant to how complete a player he is? Seriously? Then proceed to say that since Kobe's jumpshot is a strength it negates the presence of his mid-range, post, and penetration games?

High percentage foul shooters almost universally are perimeter based players because they are not just high percentage foul shooters but high percentage jump shooters who often lack the skills to penetrate which draws contact and thus fouls. As such, they hang out on the perimeter where you are drastically less likely to get any kind of shooting foul, let alone a foul at all.

But good shooting and the ability to penetrate aren't mutually exclusive, and there's no reason a solid penetrator shouldn't also shoot 80% from the line.

It is not a case of the defense taking an "out" by "hacking" it is more of a case of the player not venturing into the paint to begin with.

That only applies to players that don't venture into the paint. Hack-a-Shaq wouldn't be a very popular technique if the guy shot 80% from the line.

Maggette, Pierce (in his prime) and Arenas drive like mad and are big for their positions

Doesn't that description also fit LeBron?

Which brings us back to the original point (which was of course ignored) of this line of reasoning. LeBron, despite 75% shooting, takes vastly more free throws and thus brings you seven to eight points from the line plus twice as many "and-ones." A player like Kobe can shoot 84% but gets you only six points.

Again, though, a Kobe is going to get more open looks in which the defense backs off, whereas they're more likely to foul LeBron, causing him to miss the field goal. At the very least it'd even out.

[Andrew]

Anyways, on more relevant matter...
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/05/27/1 ... scuss.html

Wade also questioned the Chicago Bulls' loyalty to former players in an interview with the Chicago Tribune.

followed by...

``I see Michael Jordan is not there. Scottie Pippen is not there. You know these guys are not a part [of the organization]. So that is probably one of the biggest things for me, because I'm a very loyal person.''

I wanna hear what Andrew has to say about this, or Air Gordie. Him saying such things can affect Lebron or other fellow FA's decisions, I hafta assume.

I commented on it in the Bulls thread but basically, I'm not surprised. It was a concern ten years ago when Krause was still around and it's a concern now with the way Paxson and Forman have handled business and conducted themselves.

Greg Oden is one-dimensional, all he does is get injured.

Not true, he can also take nude pictures.

[NovU]

Really? Shooting 33% from three is absolutely the bare minimum requirement to be allowed to shoot at all. 40% is generally the 'green-light' number.

Kobe is shooting 33% too.

Not only does that have nothing to do with my point, it doesn't even make any sense.

Hearing this from a guy claiming Lebron is one dimensional and Kobe isn't, offends me.

Something so obvious as what? I'm not even sure what your point is, I sure as hell can't see stats to back it up.

77% of shots are jumpers as benji already stated this above. What kinda cracks are you smoking there?

When did I say that it was exclusively about spot-up jumpshooting?

You are the one that brought this subject up. Still failed to show why it is important for Bron needs to be a spot up shooter to live up his full potential.

Anyone shooting below 80% from the free-throw line should be shooting better.

Good. With that said, now prove why Lebron is one dimensional and how he is not living up to his full potential.

What? You concede that he's a poor shooter and then say that's irrelevant to how complete a player he is? Seriously? Then proceed to say that since Kobe's jumpshot is a strength it negates the presence of his mid-range, post, and penetration games?

Again, you falling off the track here. You are the one claiming that Lebron is one dimensional due to not having a good shooting touch. Yet you keep saying Kobe this and that. Please, if Kobe is your best case, just say so.

I won't bother anymore. This guy never gonna learn even if the whole world was against him. Was good reading benji's posts though. Were great. Too bad can't say same for the other.

[NovU]

I commented on it in the Bulls thread but basically, I'm not surprised. It was a concern ten years ago when Krause was still around and it's a concern now with the way Paxson and Forman have handled business and conducted themselves.

Can't completely rule out the possibility of Wade ending up in Chicago, but now I like the chance less. Hearing all these negative news on Paxson and management only makes the matter worse I guess, especially considering there are Bosh, Wade, Amare, or James to fish this coming offseason. Nonetheless, Chicago is a big market team, so should be able to draw fair amount of interests.

Meanwhile, I look forward to hear about the meeting between James, Wade, and Joe. I certainly don't like Joe in this mix as I wouldn't want neither James or Wade to end up with him. Joe, I don't think belongs to the group of max or near max players, but seems like it'll be inevitable due to so much money being available this offseason.

[koberulz]

Really? Shooting 33% from three is absolutely the bare minimum requirement to be allowed to shoot at all. 40% is generally the 'green-light' number.

Kobe is shooting 33% too.

This year. He's had far better years. Lebron has only shot above 33% from three twice - 34 and 35%. Kobe's been as high as 38.

Hearing this from a guy claiming Lebron is one dimensional and Kobe isn't, offends me.

Even if 'one-dimensional' is a small exaggeration, Kobe Bryant is a far more diverse offensive player than LeBron has ever been, yet you continue to imply the inverse to be true. What gives?

77% of shots are jumpers as benji already stated this above. What kinda cracks are you smoking there?

He shoots lots of shots, therefore he's a good shooter? What kind of crack are you smoking?

When did I say that it was exclusively about spot-up jumpshooting?

You are the one that brought this subject up. Still failed to show why it is important for Bron needs to be a spot up shooter to live up his full potential.

Yes, but as an aspect of LeBron's game he would be well served by improving, not as the sole thing LeBron needs to do to be Teh Gratest Evah. How can a player who can't be a spot-up shooter when required possibly be living up to his full potential? If there's something he can't do, he hasn't reached his potential. Kobe hasn't reached his potential. Michael never reached his potential. Both of those players have far more diverse games than LeBron.

Anyone shooting below 80% from the free-throw line should be shooting better.

Good. With that said, now prove why Lebron is one dimensional and how he is not living up to his full potential.

I don't get it. Your argument seems to be "yes, I agree with your point. Your point does not prove your point. Please prove your point." How can I prove a point I've proven if you've agreed that it's been proven but don't concede that I've proven it?

He doesn't shoot above 80% from the line. He could shoot above 80% from the line. Therefore he has not filled his potential. It's not really that difficult. Further, since he shoots such a low percentage from the line, he lacks that facet of his game - along with the long-range shot mentioned previously, and any sort of mid-range or post game. How you can agree with these points and not concede that there is room for improvement and LeBron is an incomplete player is beyond me.

What? You concede that he's a poor shooter and then say that's irrelevant to how complete a player he is? Seriously? Then proceed to say that since Kobe's jumpshot is a strength it negates the presence of his mid-range, post, and penetration games?

Again, you falling off the track here. You are the one claiming that Lebron is one dimensional due to not having a good shooting touch. Yet you keep saying Kobe this and that. Please, if Kobe is your best case, just say so.

I never said LeBron was one-dimensional due to not having a good shooting touch. Having a good shooting touch doesn't make you multi-dimensional. Kobe has a long-range shot, is a good free-throw shooter, can play in the post and the mid-range, and can get to the rim. Multiple ways of scoring, multiple dimensions. LeBron scores solely by getting to the rim, and lacks a solid long-range shot, good free-throw shooting, and any sort of post or mid-range game. One way of scoring, one dimension. The fact that, in Kobe's case, one of those dimensions is shooting is irrelevant.

[NovU]

Sorry but were you abused as a child?

[koberulz]

What? What does that have to do with anything at all to do with this discussion?

[NovU]

No offense, but I think you are just denying and denying something so obvious. Seems like you belong to another world to me.

[koberulz]

How am I denying something obvious? You've agreed with half my points, yet fail to see how those smaller points come together to prove my bigger point.

The only truly effective way LeBron James scores is penetration. He has no post game, no mid-range game, and no long-range game. He's a poor free-throw shooter. Clearly, because of all these facts, there is room for LeBron to improve. Therefore, LeBron has not reached his full potential.

How you can agree with all but the first and last sentences of that is beyond me.

[NovU]

I agreed that he has flaws, but that's it and none to your points. Just because I can see where some of your ideas are coming from, it don't mean I agree with you at all...

The points you were trying to make... non sense. You logic... non sense and also your standard abnormal. On the other side, benji's points I thought were awesome to the point where you shouldn't even argued against.

I am just saying cuz I get the feeling you are arguing just for the sake of arguments. That's not healthy.

[koberulz]

You agree that he has flaws, but don't agree that he's not reached his full potential? Yeah, that makes sense.

[NovU]

Latter part of page 4, we've went over that claim of yours. You just didn't come up with reasons to back your claims. I'm out, man... pointless here.

[koberulz]

What? What more do I need to do to back up the claim that he hasn't reached his full potential than prove that he has flaws? If you agree that he has flaws (which you've said you do), you have to also agree he hasn't reached his full potential. Otherwise your position is that LeBron James is a living paradox.

[NovU]

Talking about flaws and saying somebody's not playing up to full potential, are something anybody can do.It was more of your bullcraps on Lebron and Kobe that amused me.

[koberulz]

What?